[9] RFR(S): 8139906: assert(src->section_index_of(target) == CodeBuffer::SECT_NONE) failed: sanity

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[9] RFR(S): 8139906: assert(src->section_index_of(target) == CodeBuffer::SECT_NONE) failed: sanity

Tobias Hartmann-2
Hi,

please review the following patch:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139906
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8139906/webrev.00/

On ARM, the card table address used in the g1_post_barrier_slow stub should not be marked as relocatable (similar to what we do on x86 [1]). This was fixed on ARM before but the fix was removed by another change (see comments in the bug).

Tested with failing test and RBT (running).

Thanks,
Tobias

[1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/file/fcc911c59d4c/src/cpu/x86/vm/c1_Runtime1_x86.cpp#l1710
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [9] RFR(S): 8139906: assert(src->section_index_of(target) == CodeBuffer::SECT_NONE) failed: sanity

Vladimir Kozlov
Looks good.

Thanks,
Vladimir

On 2/22/17 7:50 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote:

> Hi,
>
> please review the following patch:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139906
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8139906/webrev.00/
>
> On ARM, the card table address used in the g1_post_barrier_slow stub should not be marked as relocatable (similar to what we do on x86 [1]). This was fixed on ARM before but the fix was removed by another change (see comments in the bug).
>
> Tested with failing test and RBT (running).
>
> Thanks,
> Tobias
>
> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/file/fcc911c59d4c/src/cpu/x86/vm/c1_Runtime1_x86.cpp#l1710
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [9] RFR(S): 8139906: assert(src->section_index_of(target) == CodeBuffer::SECT_NONE) failed: sanity

Tobias Hartmann-2
Thanks, Vladimir!

Best regards,
Tobias

On 22.02.2017 20:17, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:

> Looks good.
>
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
>
> On 2/22/17 7:50 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> please review the following patch:
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139906
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8139906/webrev.00/
>>
>> On ARM, the card table address used in the g1_post_barrier_slow stub should not be marked as relocatable (similar to what we do on x86 [1]). This was fixed on ARM before but the fix was removed by another change (see comments in the bug).
>>
>> Tested with failing test and RBT (running).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tobias
>>
>> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/file/fcc911c59d4c/src/cpu/x86/vm/c1_Runtime1_x86.cpp#l1710
>>